Comparison of the effect of general anesthesia and spinal anesthesia technique combined with general anesthesia on intraabdominal volume during gynecological laparoscopy

Purpose We aimed to investigate the effect of spinal anesthesia which will be performed simultaneously with general anesthesia on the site of operation with the same pressure. Material and method This study was conducted as a randomized, prospective clinical study on 40 patients who were randomly di...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research 2022-12, Vol.48 (12), p.3262-3268
Main Authors: Kızılet, Hakan, Cömert, Ercan, Taflan, Şener, Doğan, Ozan, Beşir, Ahmet, Kart, Cavit
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Abdomen
abdominal cavity
Anesthesia
Body mass index
Body measurements
Carbon dioxide
General anesthesia
Laparoscopy
Patients
peritoneal cavity
peritoneum
pneumoperitoneum
Statistical analysis
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Purpose We aimed to investigate the effect of spinal anesthesia which will be performed simultaneously with general anesthesia on the site of operation with the same pressure. Material and method This study was conducted as a randomized, prospective clinical study on 40 patients who were randomly divided into two groups. Twenty women underwent general anesthesia (Group GA) and 20 women underwent spinal anesthesia with general anesthesia (Group SGA). For all cases, preoperative height, weight, waist circumference, body mass index (kg/m2), the distance between both spina iliaca anterior superior, the distance of the intersection of both ribs with an imaginary line drawn over the anterior axillary line, suprapubic bone‐umbilical, umbilical‐xiphoid, and suprapubic bone‐xiphoid distance from the midline of the abdomen were measured. Moreover, while the patient was lying in the neutral position on the operating table, the height of the highest point of the abdomen to the operating table was also measured. These measurements were repeated at intra‐abdominal pressure (IAP) 14 and 25 mmHg. The amount of intra‐abdominal insufflated CO2 was also recorded at IAP 14 and 25 mmHg. Results When the intra‐abdominal insufflation volumes of both groups were compared at 14 and 25 mmHg, respectively, there was no statistical difference (p: 0.54, p: 0.40). When 14 and 25 mmHg were compared in all cases, a statistically significant difference was observed in other measurements except in xiphoid‐umbilical distance (p 
ISSN:1341-8076
1447-0756
DOI:10.1111/jog.15435